Sig, I *never* said anything like that. I do think that Microsoft is in decline, and it would not surprise me at all if Apple didn't want to play along with their whims, trying hit a moving target that will cause them to do extra work at the potential expense of their own market share.
Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Igor Stasenko Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 9:43 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone On 11 April 2010 17:29, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bsch...@anest.ufl.edu> wrote: > Interesting theory. The question is are they trying to force developers to > buy Macs, or are they simply trying to avoid the hassles of targeting > Windows? 10+ years to present day is an interesting time frame. OLE was > pretty much out of the way (supported but not pressed and certainly not > dominating the work flow of the masses), COM was still the answer to > everything, at least until the OCX/ActiveX silliness got into full swing, and > then they started threatening to do away with native code (.Net, presentation > framework, end of the portable executable format, etc.). > > If I could avoid all of that *and* sell some of my high-priced hardware at > the same time, I might do the same thing that Apple is doing. > But what makes you think, that your approach to software development is any better than any other one? Or, that having C, C++, Object-C and JavaScript is all what today's developper needs? > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr > [mailto:pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of > Lawson English > Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 5:36 PM > To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Bye bye pharo on the iPhone > > Igor Stasenko wrote: >> 2010/4/10 John M McIntosh <john...@smalltalkconsulting.com>: >> >>> On 2010-04-10, at 9:08 AM, Stefan Marr wrote: >>> >>> >>>> There are rumors, that this change is motived by technical reasons related >>>> to multitasking. >>>> I could imagine some nice tricks related to the efforts Apple is putting >>>> into LLVM, to actually have a 'smart' C/C++ runtime system which allows to >>>> assess what kind of activity profile an app is going to exhibit. >>>> This is already hard enough with C, prohibiting any VM technology seems to >>>> be a reasonable step, if they are actually going to employ any analysis >>>> techniques to get their multitasking stuff 'right'. >>>> >>>> But this is pure speculation. >>>> >>>> In the light of Steve Job's remark: "We just shipped it on Saturday, and >>>> we rested on Sunday." everything is possible, even that he is just going... >>>> >>>> >>>>>> http://www.macrumors.com/2010/04/09/fallout-from-apples-exclusion >>>>>> - of-flash-to-iphone-export-continues/ >>>>>> >>>> The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's >>>> plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. >>>> The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement >>>> smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime >>>> or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave >>>> identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app. >>>> >>>> "[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some >>>> threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. >>>> Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the >>>> tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe. >>>> << >>>> >>> Nonsense. >>> >>> An hour with some unix internals book and reading a bit about >>> suspend/resume, and reflect on what happens when you sleep your unix based >>> laptop shows there is no magic involved, just a bit of change to how >>> Processes are managed. >>> >> >> +1.. this is a bullshit. >> Instead of solving the problem, they locking-down their platform. >> >> Its like saying "we're going to build an aircrafts with 4 wings, and >> from this moment, all two-winged planes should stop being used >> worldwide". >> >> > Its just a way of making sure that all iPhone/iPad/Mac development is still > done on Macs, IMHO. > > 10+ years ago, Apple promised developers a way to program Mac OS X > 10+ apps > for Windows. > > With the advent of QuickTime X, based on Cocoa libs, I've been > speculating that Apple was planning on leveraging those libraries as a > distribution of Mac OS X frameworks to Windows that 3rd party > developers could use. > > It doesn't seem a total stretch that if Apple does this, they want to > make sure that iPhone/iPad apps can only be developed on Mac and by > extension, Mac OS X applications, even for Windows, will only be > developed on the Mac as well. One IDE to rule them all: Mac OS X, > iphone/ipad/iTouch, and now (MAYBE) Windows... > > > Lawson > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
